Site Index

Fred Venditti presented LeRoy Graf, immediate past president of the Senate, with a plaque in recognition of his service to the Senate. Graf then recognized all former Senate presidents and presented plaques to those in attendance. The presentations were made in chronological order. They were as follows: 1972--C. W. Keenan (Mrs. Keenan accepted the plaque on behalf of her late husband); 1973--Luther Keller; 1974--Arthur Jones (unable to attend); 1975--Ronald Fraser (unable to attend); 1976--Clint Allison; 1977--Frank Leuthold; 1978--Russell French (unable to attend); 1979--Carl Pierce; 1980--Pauline Bayne; 1981--Ken Kenney; 1982--Ken Walker.

Fred Venditti expressed appreciation to Bernard Silverstein for instigating the past president's recognition ceremony and for being responsible for securing the handsome plaques.

Fred Venditti introduced new Senators by having each one stand and be recognized. Venditti then introduced Senate committee chairpersons. They follow: Athletics--Ralph Dimmick; Budget--Wayne Claycombe; Bylaws--Marian Moffett; Committee on Committees--Marian Moffett; Development and Alumni Relations--Tom Hood; Educational Policy--Lee Humphreys; Executive Committee--Fred Venditti; Faculty Affairs--Henry Frandsen and Anne Mayhew (co-chairs); Faculty and Staff Benefits--Henry Fribourg; International Education--David Harrison; Legislative--Bernard Silverstein; Library--Ronald Magid; Nominating--Dolly Hough; Professional Development--Madge Donnellan; Research Council--Alex Van Hook; Student Affairs--Bruce Wheeler.

Jack Reese spoke briefly regarding his recommendation that UTK adopt a semester calendar. He reminded the Senate that full details of the recommendation could be found in the 24 September 1984 edition of Context. The main point Reese emphasized to the Senate was that President Boling is appointing a committee from the Board of Trustees to study the recommendation, and that this committee will allow ample opportunity for dissenting views to be heard. John Prados will be the staff person responsible for the committee.

Reese informed the Senate that UT Martin has voted to change from a quarter to a semester system, and the Martin proposal will be considered by the Board of Trustees along with the one from UTK. The Board, however, will take no action on either proposal at the October Board meeting. Action will be taken following the committee study.

Homer Fisher explained to the Senate that the Tennessee Higher Education Commission is in the process of recommending to the state legislature changes in the formula by which higher education in Tennessee is funded. THEC has approved in principle changing from the traditional enrollment driven formula to one which recognizes the different missions of state schools. UTK will benefit substantially from this approach, since UTK is recognized by THEC as the flagship university, and, as such, will be compared with selected peer institutions across the nation. The list of schools THEC has chosen for comparison is as follows: the universities of Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Indiana at Bloomington, Kansas, Kentucky, North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Nebraska at Lincoln, Oklahoma, and Virginia. In comparison with these schools, UTK ranks significantly lower in faculty salaries. Since this differential is not so great when similar peer comparisons are used with other state schools, UTK would receive a relatively higher percentage of state funds allocated to higher education.

In spite of the optimism which the new approach to funding should generate, Fisher cautioned that even if it is approved finally by the commission, the most important factor is the amount of money available for distribution to higher education. In order for UTK to reach funding parity with peer institutions there must be increased state support, and even with additional support, it will take several years for parity to become a reality.

The following corrections should be made in the Senate minutes for 9 July 1984: Page 1, under proxies--Gail Disney should be listed as proxy for John Smith. Page 6, second paragraph, number one--The effective date should be Fall 1985 rather than Fall 1984. This had to do with computation of grade point averages based on courses taken only at UTK.

The minutes of the Senate meeting of 9 July 1964 were approved.

Fred Venditti mentioned the following from the minutes of the 17 September meeting: 1) Marian Moffett will serve as the Senate representative on the search committee for a replacement for the late Howard Aldmon; 2) the faculty workload policy will be presented to the full Senate for action when a final draft has been agreed upon by the committee developing the policy; 3) members of the Executive Committee are participating in the search process for the Vice Provost for Research by attending luncheons with the candidates; and 4) the Research Council is holding interview sessions with the Vice Provost for Research to which all faculty are invited. Dates and times of those sessions will be announced In tomorrow's Daily Beacon.

The minutes of the Executive Committee meeting of 17 September 1984 were accepted by the Senate.

Marian Moffett, chairperson, distributed a revised list of all Senate committees. She explained that some student appointments had still not been made, but all Senators should be aware of their committee assignments. Questions and/or corrections should be directed to Moffett.

Henry Fribourg, chair, reported on the status of various faculty benefits. Among those were: 1) part-time faculty can now participate in a retirement program; 2) the university has implemented most of the recommendations included In a report from this committee dealing with leaves of absence; 3) there has been a reduction in mental health insurance coverage as of I July 1984; 4) the legislature has passed a bill which entitles retirees to be covered by group insurance (The State Insurance Committee must implement this.); and 5) the UT system administration is studying the financial impact of waiving fees of families of university employees (A report from this study will be forthcoming.).

Fribourg announced that the third annual meeting of Fringe Benefits Committees from across the state will be held on 3 November.

In response to a question regarding part-time faculty, Homer Fisher suggested that since there are so many categories, individuals concerned with this should work directly with Harold Whitehead's office.

Bernie Silverstein, chair, gave the report. He indicated that the committee had met on 24 September to develop an agenda for the 1984-85 school year. Among the plans are: a) to meet with Joe Johnson and Bill Fox to discuss the political and economic effects of tax reform as well as ways the Faculty Senate can influence the legislature and the Governor to undertake such reform; b) to meet with John Wilder, Ned Ray McWherter and the Governor to explain the position of the Senate; c) meet with the Knox County Delegation after the election to present funding views; d) invite John Bragg to the campus to give his presentation on tax reform; and e) explore the possibility of continuing the Student Ambassadors program. Ken Walker will be responsible for this.

Ralph Norman presented the recommendation from the Undergraduate Council regarding proposed course requirements for the admission of freshmen students to UTK. After Norman discussed rationale for the proposal, he asked Anne Hopkins to present some information regarding the status of Tennessee high schools with respect to offering courses to meet the proposed admission requirements.

Hopkins reported that based on a survey of state high schools, 77 percent of all, public schools in Tennessee offer sufficient courses to meet the requirements. The largest deficiency is in foreign language. Insofar as deficient schools are concerned, Hopkins assured the Senate that UTK would be working with such schools between now and 1989, when the proposal is recommended to become effective, to provide assistance in overcoming the deficiencies.

A lengthy debate followed the Norman and Hopkins presentations.

Don Williams and Henry Fribourg spoke in opposition to the proposed changes. Reasons given were: 1) UTK would become elitist; 2) some students in agriculture come from rural high schools with no opportunity to take a foreign language; 3) traditionally students in agriculture do not choose to take a foreign language; 4) the proposal limits the number of electives available to high school students; and 5) the proposal will reduce the number of students majoring in agriculture at UTK.

Senators speaking in favor of the proposal generally pointed out that the proposal was not unreasonable and that most of the Senators had similar high school requirements twenty-five years ago.

The concern over the foreign language requirement was reflected by the following motion made by B. L. Bledsoe: move to amend the motion for approval such that curricula which require 195 quarter hours or more to graduate will allow college credit for required remedial courses in foreign language.

The motion to amend was defeated by a vote of 41 to 27.

The Senate approved the proposal as presented by the Undergraduate Council. It follows.

PROPOSED COURSE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE ADMISSION OF FRESHMEN STUDENTS TO THE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE, KNOXVILLE

1. Four (4) years (units) of English;

2. Three (3) years of mathematics, of which two (2) years shall be algebra and one (1) year from plane and solid geometry, trigonometry, advanced math, or calculus;

3. Two (2) years of natural science, at least one (1) year of which should be biology, chemistry, or physics;

4. One (1) year of American History;

5. One ( 1) year of European or world history or world geography; and

6. Two (2) years of a single foreign language.

These freshmen admissions requirements apply to all freshmen applicants. Different requirements for special categories are presented in other sections of the Undergraduate Catalog. Special categories include international students, students who took the GED test in lieu of a high school diploma, re-entry students, early admission students, and students taking university courses while still in high school. While a non-degree student does not have to meet all these requirements, conversion at any time to degree-seeking status will require a student to meet all admission requirements which have not been satisfied, either in high school or through completion of the appropriate college courses. Applicants with deficiencies may be admitted to UTK, particularly those from high schools which do not have adequate offerings, on the condition that courses taken to satisfy such deficiencies will not count as credit toward graduation.

Effective for applicants for Fall, 1989.

Full rationale for the proposal was distributed to Senators with materials for today's meeting. Additional discussion may be found in the Undergraduate Council minutes of 26 January 1984, pp. 5914-5915.

Fred Venditti announced the following actions were taken by the Board of Trustees at the 19 October 1984 meeting:

1. Approved a one-third tuition fee waiver per quarter for specified family members of UT faculty and staff. This will become effective Fall 1985.

2. Approved in principle the more stringent UTK admission requirements which had been approved by the Faculty Senate. Final approval is expected following consideration by the State Board of Education and the Board of Regents.

3. Appointed a committee to study the semester/quarter issue. John Prados is the staff person responsible for the committee. Questions and/or comments should be sent to him.

Henry Fribourg announced that the Board at the 19 October meeting had also approved a recommendation whereby the University will pay the deductible on the liability insurance of the officers and directors.

Henry Fribourg made the following correction to the Senate minutes of 1 October 1984. Page four, under High School Requirements, paragraph three, number two, should read as follows: Many students in agriculture who come from rural high schools, and students from inner city schools, have no opportunity to take a foreign language.

The minutes for the Senate meeting of 1 October 1984 were approved as corrected.

The following corrections should be made in the minutes of 15 October 1984:
Page 1, under Remarks by George Wheeler, line 5, an should be a;
Page 2, under Faculty Patent and Copyright Policy, third paragraph, counselor (spelling);
Page 2, under Legislative Committee, first paragraph, seventh line, positions (spelling).

From the minutes, Venditti mentioned that the joint Senate-Provost Committee on Appointment, Promotion and Tenure would have a proposal to the full Senate sometime during Winter Quarter. Suggestions for the committee should be given to Henry Frandsen, chair.

The Executive Committee minutes from the meeting of 15 October 1984 were accepted by the Senate.

Marian Moffett, chairperson, distributed a written report which explained the administrative representation on the Faculty Senate. Moffett related that the Bylaws Committee continues to consider this issue, and that a proposal may be forthcoming once the decision is made concerning whether faculty or administrators will chair the Undergraduate and Graduate Councils. The Bylaws Committee welcomes comments from Senators on the matter.

Bernie Silverstein, chairperson, reported that the committee is attempting to schedule a presentation on the UTK campus by State Representative John Bragg, chair of the Special Task Force on Tax Reform. Unfortunately, Bragg will not be able to attend on 26 November which is reserved for a called Senate meeting. However, most Senators indicated by a show of hands, that they would be willing to attend a special meeting sometime later during the week of the 26th if Bragg could be scheduled. Silverstein will keep the Senate informed.

Bernie Silverstein, chair of an ad hoc committee to draft an inclement weather policy, presented the revised policy which had been distributed with the materials for today's Senate meeting. The policy, after a few minor editorial changes, was approved by the Senate, and will be sent to the Chancellor for his consideration. The policy follows.

INCLEMENT WEATHER POLICY

The University of Tennessee, Knoxville, will remain open except in the most severe weather conditions.

The Chancellor may officially close or suspend selected activities of the University because of extreme weather conditions. When a decision to close is reached, campus and local radio and TV stations will be notified so that appropriate announcements may be made.

If the University is officially closed, certain essential activities such as food services, physical plant, police, steam plant and telephone services will continue to operate. Some facilities such as the Library and University Center will, if possible, continue to function as a service to students and faculty. When the University is officially closed, its policy on Days of Administrative Closing will apply for staff exempt and staff nonexempt employees.

In the event of inclement weather when the University remains open, all faculty, administrators and staff will be expected to make every reasonable effort to maintain their work schedules, but are advised to avoid undue risks in traveling. Employees who anticipate arriving late or not arriving at work at all should notify their immediate supervisors. Employees will have the option of charging their time off to annual leave or leave without pay; or, with approval, they may make up their lost work hours.

Students will be responsible for any academic work which they miss due to absences caused by severe weather conditions. It is the individual student's responsibility to take the initiative to make up any missed classwork and it is the instructor's responsibility to provide a reasonable opportunity for students to complete any assignments or examinations missed due to such absences.

Alex Van Hook, chair of the Research Council, reported that the new policy on Patents, Copyrights, and Licensing had been approved by the Board of Trustees at the 19 October meeting. Van Hook explained the process by which the policy had been approved and expressed the opinion that the UT administration never intended for the UTK Faculty Senate to approve the policy before it was presented to the Board.

The Senate Executive Committee, as reported in the minutes of 15 October 1984 meeting, had expressed concern over the fact that faculty approval was not sought. Based on this concern, Fred Venditti appointed a committee (LeRoy Graf, chair; Bernie Silverstein and Hugh Welch) to draft a statement expressing Senate concerns. The full Senate generally agreed with this action by the Executive Committee and several Senators suggested that the statement should reflect the position that all matters directly affecting faculty should be presented to the Faculty Senate for approval/disapproval.

Richard Wirtz, who was one of the UTK faculty members on the Patent Copyright Policy Committee, informed the Senate that the new policy is now in the interpretive stage. Wirtz requested that copies of interpretive information received by faculty, especially in the form of questions and responses to questions, be sent to Wirtz or the chair of the Research Council, Alex Van Hook.

Ralph Norman presented the minutes from the Undergraduate Council meeting of 11 October 1984. He mentioned that Council had approved a revised honors policy which stipulates that the honors category is based only on the UTK grade point average, and that in order to qualify a student must have earned at least 90 quarter hours at UTK. The policy will become effective in Fall of 1985 and not in Fall of 1984 as it appears in Council minutes. The complete policy may be found on page 6132 of the minutes.

Norman requested that the following courses from the College of Nursing be withdrawn pending further consideration: Nursing 4115, 4235 and 4285 (p. 6155).

Tom Hood requested that Speech 3351 (p. 6150) be withdrawn until the Sociology Department has an opportunity to review the proposed course.

The Senate agreed to withdraw the Speech and Nursing courses.

To clarify a question about 4000-level courses for graduate credit, Linda Tober indicated that the Graduate Council must approve such courses.

Since much of the curricular material was concerned with new admission to Teacher Education requirements in the College of Education, Norman introduced Richard Wisniewski, dean of the college, and asked him to address the Senate regarding proposed reforms in teacher preparation at UTK. Wisniewski gave an overview of the reforms which included the following: 1) reducing enrollment in the college by 10 per cent; 2) having prospective teacher education students interviewed by an admissions board; 3) extending the student teaching experience to fifteen to sixteen weeks to conform to public school semester calendars; and 4) instituting more micro-teaching experiences for students.

Following Wisniewski's presentation, there was a general discussion of the admission requirements as they appear on pp. 6136-6146 of the Undergraduate Council minutes. Several Senators objected to aspects of the requirements which deal with speech and hearing evaluations, socio-emotional assessment and review of student's conduct records. Based on these objections, Alex Van Hook moved that items 3, 4, and 5 on page 6137 and the corresponding items on page 6141 be referred back to the Undergraduate Council for further consideration. Tom Hood was the second for the motion. The motion failed by a vote of 27 to 29.

The Undergraduate Council minutes for 11 October 1984 were approved with the exception of Nursing 4115, 4235, and 4285 (D. 6155) and Speech 3351 (p. 6150).

Mary Richards reported on the Graduate Council minutes of 4 October 1984. She mentioned the following policy changes: 1) the signature of a student's advisor will no longer be required on registration materials including drop and add slips; 2) the number of official transcripts required by the Graduate School has been reduced from two to one; and 3) a statement indicating permission to use will be required in master's and Ed.S. theses. The effective date for all three policies will be I January 1985.

In regard to curricular materials, Richards reported that the Department of Curriculum and Instruction in the College of Education had revised the nine M.S. degree programs into one major of Curriculum and Instruction with nine concentrations. In accordance with the intent of the Graduate Council, Richards mentioned that Senate consideration of the new Knowledge Engineering program in Engineering Sciences at UTSI was postponed until other interested departments had an opportunity to comment (Graduate Council minutes, p. 2 and Appendix A, p.3).

Several Senators, particularly new Senators, indicated they had not received the Graduate Council minutes. Fred Venditti took note of this and instructed the secretary to attempt to correct the situation.

Although some Senators had not had an opportunity to review the minutes, Venditti ruled that a sufficient number of Senators had received them, and therefore he requested Senate approval.

The Senate approved the Graduate Council minutes of 4 October 1984.

1. The Board of Trustees' committee considering the semester/quarter issue will hold an open hearing on the UTK campus on 14 February from 9:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M. in the Shiloh Room of the University Center. All faculty, staff, and students are invited to attend, ask questions and offer suggestions. Additional information about the meeting may be obtained from John Prados.

2. Otto Wheeley will be available at 9:00 A.M. on 22 January in the Shiloh Room of the University Center to answer questions regarding the new venture capital center which is entering into an arrangement with the UT Research Corporation. Wheeley, a member of the Development Council and the research division of Koppers Corporation, will work part-time with the Research Corporation in the venture capital/Research Corporation endeavor. Interested faculty are invited to attend the 22 January meeting.

3. The Board of Trustees will meet in Nashville on 24 January. One purpose of the meeting is to consider the new requirements for admission to UT system schools. Reese, in discussing the requirements, distributed a hand-out prepared by the State Board of Education which compared the high school requirements for university admission at UTK, UTC and UTM, as well as the requirements proposed by THEC and the State Board of Education. The requirements, as illustrated in the hand-out, were very similar.

4. The day following the Board of Trustees' meeting, there will be a joint meeting of the UT Board, the Board of Regents, THEC, and the State Board of Education. In addition to hearing an address by Governor Alexander, the purpose of the meeting is to discuss the development and improvement of education in Tennessee. The relationship of higher education to remedial education will also be considered.

Reese indicated that the UT Board may be able to report at the joint meeting that the new admission requirements, which are virtually the same at UTC, UTK and UTM, have been approved.

Fred Venditti introduced Homer Fisher who had been invited to address the Senate on the status of the 1985-86 budget. Fisher began by informing the group that three special committees appointed by the Planning and Budgeting Coordinating Committee were working on various long range plans for specific funding projects. The committees are as follows: 1) Library Planning and Needs Committee (Ralph Norman, chair); 2) Salary, Operating and Equipment Funding (Robert Landen, chair); 3) Campus Computer Networking (Warren Neel, chair). Recommendations from these committees will be shared with appropriate Senate committees and will also be considered during budget hearings.

In terms of the 1985-86 budget, Fisher reported that UTK should receive about an 11.6 million dollar increase. Approximately one-half of the increase will be allocated to faculty salaries and benefits. The allocation of the remaining half will be determined during budget hearings, and, as pointed out by Fisher, there are numerous areas which need additional funds. Representatives from the Senate Budget Committee, as has been the custom in the past, were invited to attend this year's hearings. They will begin the second week in February.

Jack Reese announced that the Senate Budget Committee and the Senate Executive Committee would be meeting with President Boling and Joe Johnson at a luncheon meeting on 23 January to discuss the budget. Other Senators who would like to attend should contact Reese's office.

From the Senate minutes of 29 October 1984, the following correction was noted: under the announcement section, the last line should read: the Officers and Directors Liability Insurance which covers UT employees.

The minutes of the 29 October 1984 Senate meeting were approved as corrected.

Two sets of Executive Committee minutes (12 November and 26 November) were included in the packet of materials for today's meeting. A third set, for the 7 January meeting, was distributed at the meeting.

From the 12 November minutes, the following correction should be made: Page 2, under Administrative Chairs of Undergraduate and Graduate Council, 3rd line: chair (spelling).

The minutes from the 12 November 1984 Executive Committee meeting were accepted.

From the minutes of the 26 November meeting, the following corrections should be made: Page 1, under Basketball and Religion, first paragraph, last line: Proselytizing (spelling); Page 2, under Patent Policy Meeting, first paragraph, seventh line: prerogatives (spelling).

The minutes of the 26 November Executive Committee meeting were accepted.

Since Senators had not had an opportunity to read the minutes of the 7 January Executive Committee meeting, Venditti made special note of the following topics:

1. International Education Committee--an ad hoc committee has been appointed to make recommendations to the Senate Bylaws Committee which may improve the functioning of this committee.

2. Indictment of Higher Education--LeRoy Graf, Ann Mayhew and Fred Venditti attended a meeting in Murfreesboro to deal with this matter.

Representatives from Faculty Senates, AAUP, and TEA met to discuss ways higher education in Tennessee could be improved. At the meeting, it was also decided that some type of state-wide organization, dealing specifically with higher education concerns, might be worthwhile. In order to pursue this and to synthesize the discussion from the initial meeting, a follow-up meeting was scheduled for 21 January in Murfreesboro. Venditti will participate.

Venditti stressed that people attending the meetings were not official representatives of their respective schools; they spoke only for themselves. In a brief discussion of this, LeRoy Graf pointed out that representatives should come from the overall faculty governance body on the individual campuses (generally called Faculty Senate or Faculty Council) as opposed to specialized groups such as AAUP and TEA, if a state-wide organization becomes a reality. The Senate appeared to be generally in agreement with Graf's position.

3. Hesler Teaching Award--This will be presented at the 11 February Senate meeting. Following the Senate meeting, a reception in the Graduate Lounge of the University Center will honor the recipient. All Senators are invited.

4. Educational Policy Committee--Lee Humphreys, who was to give a progress report on the work of this committee, particularly as it pertains to the chairs of the Undergraduate and Graduate Councils, will not attend today's meeting because he is ill. Humphreys will have a proposal ready for Senate consideration at either the February or March meeting.

5. Promotion and Tenure Committee--The Senate will meet on 11 March, the date reserved for a called meeting. The new promotion and tenure guidelines will be considered at that time.

6. Phased Retirement--a proposal may be available within 18 months.

7. Patent Policy--although this particular topic was not in the Executive Committee minutes of 7 January, Venditti reported that he had met with Boling on this matter; Boling is willing to address the Senate to explain Board policy on this and related faculty concerns.

The following corrections should be made from the 7 January minutes: page 2, under Remarks by George Wheeler, 1st paragraph, last line: Committee; page 3, under International Education Committee, 5th paragraph, 9th line, complaint; page 4, under Religion and Athletics, 2nd line, Woodruff.

The Executive Committee minutes from the 7 January 1985 meeting were accepted.

Henry Fribourg, chair, reported that this committee had reviewed the phased retirement proposal, and had reacted with a long letter to Ely Fly supporting it. Fly has responded that his staff continues to refine the proposal; the Faculty and Staff Benefits Committee will be asked for comments as appropriate.

David Harrison, chair, introduced David Larsen, the Director of the Center for International Education. Larsen comes to UTK from the Institute of International Education in New York where he was the director of the student Fulbright program.

Bernard Silverstein indicated that his committee is attempting to reschedule the tax reform meeting which was not held in the fall. Since John Bragg, who was originally scheduled to speak, may not be able to attend because of illness, another member of the Bragg committee may be invited.

Tom Klindt reported on the Council minutes for the 15 November meeting. He pointed out that there were two reports; one on international enrollment for fall quarter and one from the College of Home Economics.

In terms of curricular matters, there were minor changes from the Colleges of Business, Education, Liberal Arts and Nursing. The Graduate School of Planning changes were comprehensive.

Klindt, in response to an inquiry, indicated that UTSI is included in international student enrollment guidelines.

The minutes for the Graduate Council meeting of 15 November 1984 were approved.

Ralph Norman presented the Undergraduate Council minutes from the meeting of 29 November. He highlighted reports from the Committee on Writing and University Honors (p. 6164).

The full report of the University Honors Program may be found on pp. 6166 through 6169. Norman emphasized that the Senate was not being asked to endorse the program; rather the report was to be considered only as an item of information. Senators were encouraged to read the full report and send written comments to Norman, Lee Humphreys or George Wheeler.

Curricular matters were routine.

Lorayne Lester observed that there was a line missing in the Theatre curricular materials. She agreed to make the correction by phone. Since the correction would not alter the substance of the course in question, the Senate agreed to permit the correction to be handled in this manner.

The minutes of the Undergraduate Council for the 29 November meeting were approved.

George Everett suggested that the Senate pass a resolution recognizing the service of Don Hileman, Dean of the College of Communications and a member of the Senate, who died on 5 December 1984. Joseph Googe moved that such a resolution be written and sent to the Hileman family. The motion passed unanimously.

Alex Van Hook questioned whether an athlete, who had become academically ineligible at UTK, could enroll at another institution, transfer those grades back to UTK and then become eligible. Such an incident had been reported in the local press. Someone pointed out that, under present policy, it was legal for any student to take courses elsewhere and transfer the credits back in order to raise the GPA. However, the new policy on transfer of credits, which will become effective in Fall of 1985, stipulates that transfer grades will not be included in the computation of the UTK grade point average. The new transfer policy does not speak to the transfer of hours so it will still be possible for students to transfer courses from other institutions.

Venditti indicated that he would pursue the specific case which Van Hook questioned.

Fred Venditti introduced Jack Reese who presented the L. R. Hesler Teaching and Service Award to Jack Wasserman, Associate Professor of Engineering Science and Mechanics. The award was established in 1982 by the alumni of the Scarabbean Society to honor L. R. Hesler, the long- time advisor to the Society and Dean of Liberal Arts. The recipient, the recipient's department and the library receive a monetary gift made possible by the Scarabbean alumni.

Senators were invited to a reception in the Graduate Lounge of the University Center to honor Jack Wasserman immediately following the Senate meeting.

The minutes of the 14 January 1985 Senate meeting were approved as distributed.

From the 29 January 1985 Executive Committee minutes, Fred Venditti mentioned the following:

1. State-Wide Higher Education Organization--Fred Venditti, along with a small group of higher education faculty from across the state, attended a meeting in Murfreesboro on 9 February. The purpose of the meeting was to synthesize and edit material which a larger group of faculty representatives (all institutions of higher education in Tennessee were represented) had generated at a January Murfreesboro meeting. The January meeting had been called to respond to recent criticisms of higher education and to discuss ways to develop and improve higher education in Tennessee.

At the February meeting it was decided to develop bylaws which would be the first step in the establishment of an organization of faculty senates or equivalents at the state level. The proposed bylaws are to be presented at a Murfreesboro meeting scheduled for 9 April. Representatives at the April meeting will most likely be the ones who attended the initial meeting in January. LeRoy Graf, Anne Mayhew, and Fred Venditti represented UTK. They, along with Marian Moffett, will attend the April meeting. Venditti will keep the Senate informed.

2. Admission Requirements--The Board of Trustees has approved the new UTK admission requirements as approved by the Senate with one modification: students who come from high schools which do not offer a foreign language will be allowed to take the language at UTK for elective credit. Individual colleges, according to initial interpretation, will determine how such elective credit will fit into specific programs.

3. Faculty Workload Policy--This will be discussed at the next Executive Committee meeting scheduled for 25 February. The policy will eventually be' presented to the full Senate for action.

4. Faculty and Course Evaluations--At a recent meeting of the Student Undergraduate Academic Council, a resolution was passed which would require faculty and course evaluations. The Senate has been asked by the student group to study ways to implement the resolution. Fred Venditti has referred the matter to the Educational Policy Committee and requested that the Committee keep the Senate apprised of their deliberations.

There was one clarification to the 29 January minutes. Under Administrative Appointments, pages 2-3, the last sentence should reflect the concept that it would be desirable for Faculty Senates (or equivalents) at all UT system schools to approve procedures for faculty involvement in the appointment of UT system administrators.

The Executive Committee Minutes of the 29 January 1985 meeting were accepted as clarified.

Ralph Dimmick, chair, gave the report. He began by stating that, contrary to an article in the Daily Beacon of 9 February 1985, the Athletics Committee is not conducting any kind of investigation concerning religious witnessing at the Spirit Express basketball game.

Other items which Dimmick mentioned were: 1) the Athletics Committee continues to monitor funding for the Assembly Center and Arena. The office of Business and Finance will advise the Committee on an appropriate, systematic approach for such monitoring once the facility becomes a reality; 2) faculty and staff with UT identification may now purchase over-the-counter athletic tickets with personal checks; 3) faculty and staff with athletic ticket priority do not lose the priority as a result of retirement; 4) an athletic information booklet for faculty and staff is in the final stages of completion; and 5) a series of open houses for faculty and staff to visit athletic department facilities is being tentatively planned for spring quarter.

In regard to the Spirit Express basketball game, Venditti indicated that there had been no response from Bob Woodruff to a letter from the Senate Executive Committee requesting that Woodruff give assurance that such a situation would not occur in the future. Related to this, the Faculty Counselors will explore the topic of religion and athletics with President Boling at a Counselor's meeting scheduled for 22 April. Venditti will keep the Senate informed.

John Sebert, a member of the committee, gave the report. The committee continues to deliberate the broad context in which curricular decisions are made at UTK, and will present recommendations to the Senate at the 11 March or 8 April meeting. The recommendations will be concerned with: a) chairs of the Undergraduate and Graduate Councils; b) role of the Educational Policy Committee; c) membership on the Educational Policy Committee and the two Councils; and d) ways of presenting curricular materials to the Senate.

Henry Frandsen, chair, distributed a draft of proposed changes recommended for the Faculty Handbook which deal with faculty appointment, promotion and tenure. The 14 proposed changes are the work of a joint Senate/Provost's Committee which was co-chaired by Frandsen and Ralph Norman. Senators were urged to read the material carefully and to share it with colleagues (copies are being distributed to all colleges and departmental offices). The 11 March Senate meeting will be devoted to debate and voting on the proposal.

Another function of the Faculty Affairs Committee is to mediate faculty grievances. In order to improve the process, a subcommittee has been appointed to review and attempt to codify an ideal procedure. The recommendations of the subcommittee will be presented to the Senate sometime next year.

Dolly Hough, chair, reviewed Senate Bylaws in regard to nominations for President-Elect. She indicated that there should be two candidates presented at the first regular spring quarter Senate meeting, 8 April. Nominations may also be made from the floor. Voting will be by secret ballot and election results announced at the second spring quarter meeting, 6 May. Qualifications for President-Elect include: 1) fulltime appointment with the rank of assistant professor or above; 2) performance of academic duties totaling at least half- time teaching, research, service or departmental administration; and 3) serving as an elected faculty member of the Senate within the last five years.

Suggestions for nominations should be sent to Dolly Hough at 406 Music Building by 27 February. It would also be helpful to send biographical information of those nominated. The Nominating Committee will meet on 4 March.

C. W. Minkel presented the minutes for the 17 January 1985 Graduate Council meeting. In response to a question, he explained a table included in the minutes which illustrated external funding for minority graduate student support. He indicated that the acronym GPOP stood for Graduate and Professional Opportunities Programs and was federally funded. UTK has received substantial funding from that agency as well as from THEC.

In response to another question, Minkel stated that the Graduate Council had accepted the Graduate School of Planning Program Review before the Undergraduate Council had received it.

In regard to curricular materials, Kathy Davis of the Department of Educational and Counseling Psychology, responded when questioned that the courses from that department numbered 5140, 5150 and 5160 and titled Psychoeducational Assessment were not statistics courses.

The Graduate Council minutes of 17 January 1985 were approved.

Linda Tober reported on the minutes of the 24 January 1985 Undergraduate Council meeting. She called attention to a formal transfer policy which had been approved by the Council and appears on page 6181 of the minutes. The policy confirms what is currently being done, but is needed because no explicit formal policy exists.

The curricular materials included some adjustments in the Cultural Studies Major with a concentration in Women's Studies (p. 6192) and minor changes in Pre-Professional Programs (pp. 6195-6201).

Home Economics has changed the name of the Textiles and Clothing Major to Textiles and Apparel Major.

The following corrections to the minutes were noted: page 6183, under College of Home Economics, the effective date should be Summer Quarter, 1985. On page 6191, under Botany, courses numbered 1110-20-30, the last sentence in the description should read: Students may not receive credit for both Botany 1110-20-30 and Biology 1210-20-30.

The minutes of the Undergraduate Council meeting of 24 January 1985 were approved as corrected.

Henry Fribourg, chair, at the request of the committee, presented the following resolution to the Senate:

WHEREAS Three successive annual meetings of state-wide representatives of Benefits Committees from Higher Education were held in 1982, 1983, and 1984 in Nashville, Tennessee on an ad hoc basis; AND

WHEREAS These informational meetings were extremely successful for the exchange of information and the sharing of questions of common interest among the participants; AND

WHEREAS The Faculty and Staff Benefits Committee has determined that these meetings greatly facilitated the fulfilling of its mission by permitting direct communication with officials involved in decisions and programs which affect faculty and staff benefits;

BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED THAT

THE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE FACULTY SENATE hereby instructs its Faculty and Staff Benefits Committee to continue to cooperate closely with representatives of Fringe Benefits Committees from other campuses within the University of Tennessee System and from all other Higher Education campuses in the State of Tennessee to organize, sponsor, carry out, and participate in annual informational exchange meetings on matters related to faculty and staff benefits.

The Senate approved the resolution. It was agreed that the Senate Bylaws Committee would be responsible for implementing the resolution.

Alex Van Hook related that he had received complaints about the library closing during the recent early dismissal of UTK classes due to the weather. After a brief discussion, it was agreed that Venditti would convey to the Chancellor the Senate's desire for the library to remain open regardless of weather conditions providing librarians will volunteer to provide that service.

Due to a printing error, page 1 of the 11 February Senate minutes was missing from the packet of materials distributed to Senators for today's meeting. Senators had, however, been sent the missing page in a separate mailing.

The minutes of the 11 February 1985 Senate meeting were approved as distributed.

The following corrections should be noted in the Executive Committee minutes of 25 February: Page one, under Educational Policy Committee, sixth line, Committee (caps); page one, under Faculty Workload Policy, last line which continues on to page two should read: In a matter related to faculty workload, Wheeler mentioned that he would appoint, in the near future, a joint Provost-Senate Committee to work on a UT systemwide statement of professional responsibilities which will encompass such matters as extra service compensation for faculty.

Venditti mentioned committee reports from Faculty Affairs, Educational. Policy, and International Education, which had been alluded to in the minutes, would be presented to the full Senate in the Spring quarter.

The minutes of the Executive Committee meeting for 25 February 1985 were accepted by the Senate.

Henry Frandsen presented the proposed revisions in the Faculty Handbook which deal with faculty appointment, promotion and tenure procedures. Frandsen and Ralph Norman were co-chairs of a joint Senate-Provost committee to study the procedures and suggest revisions.

All faculty had been sent a copy of the fourteen recommended revisions along with the rationale for each proposed change. In addition to these materials, Senators and each college and departmental, office had been sent Chapter Three of the Faculty Handbook which had been revised and approved by the Board of Trustees in 1983. Frandsen reminded Senators to consult the 1983 version rather than the published 1978 edition when reviewing the proposed changes.

Frandsen moved that the Senate approve the revisions as distributed. Dolly Hough was the second for the motion.

Before the debate began, Lloyd Crawford pointed out that the rationale for changes seven and ten were reversed. Frandsen concurred, and instructed Senators to make the correction on their copy.

A general discussion of the revisions followed; it centered primarily on change number nine which specifies that written reasons will be provided, upon request, when tenure is denied, and that these reasons become a part of the faculty member's record. After considerable debate, William Goolsby moved to strike the last sentence in item nine which reads as follows: A faculty member making this request should be aware that this statement will become a part of the official record.

The motion died for lack of a second. Lorayne Lester moved that the last sentence in item nine be amended to read: A faculty member making this request should be aware that this statement, together with subsequent correspondence, rebuttals or rejoinders, will become a part of the official record. William Grecco was the second for the motion.

The motion to amend passed.

The Senate, by consensus, agreed to consider and vote on each revision separately.

1. Tom Hood moved approval of change number one. The Senate approved the first revision. It states that each department will adopt bylaws consistent with University policy.

2. Revision number two, which deals with the appointment letter, was discussed at length. The main point of contention was concerned with stating in the letter that retention decisions occur yearly during the probationary period. To soften the language in this proposed revision, Ken Walker moved that (c) read as follows: probationary status, indicating that be or she will be advised on an annual basis of his/her progress in achieving tenure.

After lengthy deliberation of the Walker motion, Pat Beitel and Ken Walker agreed to further refine the wording of (c). Ken Walker moved to amend as follows: 2. (c) probationary status, indicating that he or she will be advised annually of his/her retention status and progress toward tenure and promotion. Pat Beitel seconded the motion.

The motion to amend revision two (c) passed by a vote of 35 to 27.

The Senate voted to close debate on item two. Fred Venditti then called the vote on revision two as amended. The Senate approved revision number two as amended in (c). It follows:

This letter of appointment specifies (a) rank; (b) salary and related financial conditions; (c) probationary status, indicating that he or she will be advised annually of his/her retention status and progress toward tenure and promotion; (d) the academic year by which a tenure decision must have been reached; (e) general duties and expectations, and (f) the appropriate peer group to be consulted during promotion, retention, and tenure considerations.

3. and 4. Marian Moffett moved to approve revisions three and four. LeRoy Graf seconded the motion. The Senate approved revision three, which is simply an editorial change regarding a heading, and revision four which was the deletion of a paragraph.

5. LeRoy Graf moved approval of revision five. Eldredge Kennedy seconded. The Senate approved revision five. It was an editorial change which replaced the title of Vice Chancellor with that of Provost in listing the chain of command which reviews promotion and salary adjustment recommendations.

6. LeRoy Graf moved approval of revision six. Marian Moffett was the second. Change number six is a revision in format. It moves a footnote, specifying faculty who are exempt from the probation and tenure process, into the text of the Faculty Handbook. The Senate approved revision six. It follows:

A system of probation and tenure is provided for all faculty members except the following: (1) part-time faculty members; (2) faculty members whose appointment is based mainly on grants and contracts ("soft money"); and (3) faculty members who are pursuing degrees at UTK. Faculty members who enter any of these categories after receiving tenure do not thereby forfeit tenure.

Revisions three, four, five and six were approved without debate. 7. Revision seven is a proposed new paragraph in the Handbook. It states: Faculty members initially appointed as Assistant Professor will. normally be considered for promotion at the same time that they are considered for tenure.

Ted Paludan, Senator from the Space Institute, expressed the view that his unit would be very much affected by this revision since many faculty at the Space Institute are promoted and not tenured. Henry Frandsen explained that the word normally was included in the revision to allow for exceptions. George Wheeler concurred with Frandsen and assured Paludan that exceptions would be made in granting promotions without tenure.

There appeared to be consensus among Senators involved in the discussion that revision seven was being recommended because it is present policy.

At the conclusion of the discussion, Fred Venditti called for the vote. The Senate approved, by voice vote, revision seven.

8. The eighth revision explains more explicitly the process for determining tenure decisions; a new process, encouraging outside peer review, is also part of this revision. The discussion of this revision centered primarily on the relative weight of research, service and teaching in the granting of tenure.

As a result of the discussion, Pat Beitel moved the following: Refer revision eight back to the committee for re-wording and clarification so that teaching and service receive as much emphasis as research in tenure decisions. Carolyn Hodges seconded the motion.

The motion was defeated by voice vote.

Ken Walker moved to include the statement that this information should be part of the material reviewed by faculty (referring to outside peer review) and to change the order in which the tenure process is described in revision eight. Pat Beitel seconded the motion.

The motion was defeated by voice vote.

Fred Venditti called for the vote on revision eight. By voice vote, the Senate approved revision eight. There were no dissenting votes.

Revision eight follows:

Early in the academic year during which a decision will be made on tenure the candidate will submit all material relevant to consideration for tenure. After consultation with the faculty member, the Department Head is encouraged to seek the advice of a minimum of two persons not on the faculty of the University of Tennessee--Knoxville, whose expertise is close to that of the candidate and who are willing to provide thoughtful evaluation of the candidate's written work or other suitable evidence of performance. While specially appointed departmental committees may be responsible for assembling information, all tenured department faculty should examine the material relevant to the decision. A meeting of tenured department faculty will be called that will allow ample time for debate and discussion of the record and a vote, organized as provided for in the department bylaws, will be taken and recorded. This vote is advisory to the Department Head who will, in forwarding his/her recommendation to the Dean, also provide a brief summary of faculty opinion as expressed during the meeting and a report of the vote of the faculty. If the Department Head's recommendation is not the same as that of the faculty, he/she will explain to the tenured faculty the reasons for the decision. The Department Head will remind the faculty of their right to forward a dissenting report if they do not feel that the Department Head's summary of faculty opinion adequately describes their views.

Tom Hood moved to postpone consideration of revisions nine through fourteen until the next regularly scheduled Senate meeting, 8 April.

The motion passed.

The minutes of the 11 March 1985 Senate meeting were approved as distributed.

At the last Senate meeting, the Senate approved eight of 14 revisions in the Faculty Handbook dealing with appointment, promotion and tenure. At today's meeting, the remaining six revisions were to be considered. They follow and are numbered as they were referred to in the discussion.

9. Fred Venditti, after consultation with Henry Frandsen, observed that item nine had also been amended and approved at the last meeting. The Senate, by consensus, concurred with Venditti. Item nine follows:

A faculty member who has received notice of denial of tenure may request a statement of the reasons for the decision. A statement of these reasons will then be given, in writing if so requested, by the Provost's Office. A faculty member making this request should be aware that this statement, together with subsequent correspondence, rebuttals or rejoinders, will become a part of the official record.

10. Henry Frandsen distributed, at today's meeting, a slightly revised item 10. After lengthy debate, Ken Walker moved to amend as follows:

If it appears to the Head that retention is in doubt, the probationary faculty member will be notified and allowed sufficient time to present relevant material. After review of this material, a formal retention vote of the tenured faculty will be taken.

William Grecco was the second. The amendment was passed. Fred Venditti called for the vote on item 10 as amended. It passed unanimously. It follows:

The probationary period at UTK may last from one to seven years, depending upon rank and prior experience at the time of initial appointment, as well as upon quality of performance. The maximum number of years in the probationary period is specified at the initial appointment. However, the actual number of probationary years may be shortened at the discretion of the University, and stipulation of a given year for mandatory tenure review does not guarantee retention until that time.

The Department Head is responsible for an annual retention review of probationary faculty. This review will be conducted in consultation with the tenured faculty. The Head will convey the outcome of this review in a timely manner. If it appears to the Head that retention is in doubt, the probationary faculty member will be notified and allowed sufficient time to present relevant material. After review of this material, a formal. retention vote of the tenured faculty will be taken.

11. Marian Moffett move approval of item eleven. Following is the revision as approved.

When a probationary faculty member accepts a part-time position, an administrative position with the University, or an authorized leave of absence, the probationary period may be extended accordingly, upon approval of the Department Head, Dean, and Provost.

12. Revision number twelve resulted in lengthy debate which included two amendments, both of which failed: Kathy Davis moved to amend by inserting the word minimal between the words stipulated and years in line three of the first paragraph. The motion to amend failed by a vote of 27 to 24; Paul Barrette moved to amend by inserting the following sentence at the top of page 12: At this point, the Head should inform the candidate of the steps the Head plans to take and of the candidate's prerogative to appeal. The amendment failed by voice vote.

John Sebert moved approval of revision twelve. It passed. Following is the revision.

PROMOTION
The criteria for promotion to a given rank are the same as those for appointment to that rank. Early in the academic year in which a candidate is notified that he/she will be considered for promotion, the candidate will submit all materials relevant to consideration for promotion. After consultation with the faculty member, the Department Head is encouraged to seek the advice of a minimum of two persons not on the faculty of the University of Tennessee--Knoxville whose expertise is close to that of the candidate and who are willing to provide thoughtful evaluation of the candidate's written work or other suitable evidence of performance. While specially appointed department committees may be responsible for assembling information, all department faculty, at or above the rank for which the candidate is being considered should examine the material relevant to the decision. A meeting of all these faculty will be called that will allow ample time for debate and discussion of the record; and a vote, organized as provided for in the department bylaws, will be taken and recorded. This vote is advisory to the Department Head who will, in forwarding his/her recommendation to the Dean, also provide a brief summary of faculty opinion as expressed at the meeting and a report of the vote of the faculty. If the Department Head's recommendation is not the same as that of the faculty, he/she will explain to the faculty the reasons for the decision. The Department Head will remind the faculty of their right to forward a dissenting report, if they do not feel that the Head's summary of faculty opinion adequately describes their views.

A person who has been in rank for two years beyond the stipulated years required before promotion to the next rank will, upon written request to the Head, be granted a full review and consideration for promotion. If the promotion is not approved and no full review is conducted within the next two years the individual may submit a second written request (not earlier than three years after the first request). Subsequent requests for consideration may be made at the same interval.

Promotion reviews conducted on formal request by an individual will, in each case, be reviewed by the Dean and Provost regardless of the outcome at the departmental level.

13. Debate on revision thirteen, which is concerned with a college-wide promotion and tenure committee, centered on whether such a committee would be merely another bureaucratic layer or whether it would result in greater uniformity and perhaps encourage higher standards in the promotion and tenure process.

Lynda Harrison expressed the view that a college-wide committee should be elected rather than appointed by the dean, which is specified in the revision. She moved to amend with that suggestion. The amendment failed by voice vote.

Fred Venditti called for the vote on Item 13. It passed with little opposition. The complete text, as approved, follows:

COLLEGE REVIEW
After the Dean receives the recommendations of Department Heads for promotion and tenure, these recommendations will be submitted to the College Promotion and Tenure Committee. This Committee, which may vary in size in different Colleges, will consist of tenured faculty appointed by the Dean of the College. The Dean may serve as chair of the committee. Membership will be for three years, with one-third of the members being replaced each year. Committee membership should represent the diversity of disciplines and academic missions in the college. Along with the Department Head's recommendations and any dissenting reports that may have been filed by the faculty, the Promotion and Tenure Committee will receive the documentation that was submitted to the departments for each of the candidates for promotion and tenure. After deliberation, the Promotion and Tenure Committee will submit an advisory opinion to the Dean. If they are in agreement with the Department Head's recommendations, a simple acknowledgment of this is all that is required. If the Committee disagrees with the Department Head's recommendation, or if the Department Head's recommendation is different from that of the majority of the department faculty, the Committee will be required to issue an advisory opinion.

Recommendations for tenure and promotion are reviewed and approved or disapproved by each of the following officers: Dean or Director, Provost, Chancellor, President. The Board of Trustees must give final approval for tenure. A candidate will be informed of the status of his or her candidacy for tenure and or promotion and be promptly informed of any recommendation against tenure or promotion. In particular, the decision of the Provost will be communicated to the candidate in a timely manner in order to permit the candidate an opportunity to appeal the decision before the end of the academic year.

14. Venditti called for the vote on revision fourteen. It passed without discussion, and is included here:

PROCESS REVIEW
A review of university promotion and tenure policies will be conducted every five years by a group answerable jointly to the Faculty Senate and to the Provost. Department Heads and Deans will be consulted in this process.

Henry Fribourg questioned what would happen if these revisions were not followed. George Wheeler responded that all faculty have the right to a formal appeal. This has not changed and is explained in the Faculty Handbook.

The ballot for the Committee on Committees was distributed at today's meeting. Fred Venditti asked Senators to vote and return their ballots before the end of the meeting.

Dolly Hough, chair, presented the nominees for President-Elect of the Senate: Nancy Lay, Professor of Physical Education and Bernard Silverstein, Professor of Audiology and Speech Pathology. Venditti asked for nominations from the floor, hearing none, the Senate voted to close the nominations. The Senate approved the two candidates. Hugh Welch questioned the speed with which the nominations were closed. Dolly Hough responded that Senators had been informed of the nomination process at the 11 March meeting, and had been given ample time to provide suggestions to the Nominating Committee.

From the Executive Committee minutes of 25 March 1985 Venditti called attention to the section dealing with principles regarding administrative appointments. Anne Mayhew, at today's Senate meeting, had distributed a statement of the principles as well as the rationale for them. LeRoy Graf moved that the principles be approved by the full Senate. The motion passed. The statement follows:

In the selection of administrative officers whose duties will affect the faculty or the academic affairs of the University,

(1) The search committee will include members of the faculty in whom the faculty has expressed confidence.

(2) Members of the faculty will have ample opportunity to study the candidates and make their opinions known to the committee.

(3) Administrative officers responsible for recommending and making the appointment will recommend or appoint only those who have the confidence of the faculty.

Administrative officers responsible for recommending and making the appointment have the right to reject those recommended by the search committee and to charge it with finding alternative candidates.

The Executive Committee at the 25 March meeting had also approved a resolution opposing tuition equalization. Bernard Silverstein, chair of the Senate Legislative Committee, indicated that it was not too late for the full Senate to endorse the resolution if it so desired. Ken Walker moved endorsement. The motion passed and appears below:

UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE, KNOXVILLE FACULTY SENATE
RESOLUTION
OPPOSING TUITION EQUALIZATION GRANT PROGRAM LEGISLATION

WHEREAS, proposed legislation (SB648/HB442) has been introduced in the State legislature which would allow the legislature to appropriate to private institutions $500.00 for each undergraduate student who is a resident of Tennessee; and

WHEREAS, additional legislation (SB784/HB851) has been introduced which would permit the State to appropriate to students in private higher education institutions an amount equal to the appropriation for students in public institutions; and

WHEREAS, the passage of either of these bills would require the appropriation of millions of dollars of State funds; and

WHEREAS, the State of Tennessee has bad difficulty in recent years providing adequate funds to support the needs of public higher education; and

WHEREAS, providing funds for private institutions of higher education would drain funds needed for public higher education and other State supported activities; and

WHEREAS, funding of private higher education may lead eventually to the State funding of private elementary and secondary education;

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the UTK Faculty Senate express its strong opposition to the proposed State funding of private higher education; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the UTK Faculty Senate express to the Governor and the members of the legislature its opposition to the proposed legislation; and

BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED, that the UTK Faculty Senate solicit support for its position with the Faculty Senates of other public institutions of higher education, and the faculty, staff, students, and alumni of those institutions which are likely to be adversely affected.

April 8, 1985
Date Approved

Nancy Lay, Secretary

Fred Venditti, President

The Executive Committee minutes of 25 March 1985 were accepted by the Senate.

Linda Tober presented the materials from the Undergraduate Council meeting of 7 March 1985. She indicated that curricular materials were routine, and that the Council had approved one policy of significance. It deals with exceptions in high school course requirements for entrance to UTK. The complete policy may be found on p. 6216 of the minutes.

Paul Pinckney moved that University Studies courses on pp. 6228- 6229 be omitted from consideration. Ralph Norman agreed that action on these courses should be deferred until there was ample time for discussion of them.
The Senate approved the Undergraduate Council minutes of 7 March 1985 with exception of the University Studies courses.

Tom Klindt reported on the Graduate Council minutes for the meeting of 28 February 1985. He made the following corrections: Page 3, under 5-year approval, Dr. Kent D. Van Liere (spelling); page 4, Dr. Jeffrey Kovac and Dr. Harry Y. McSween should be granted unlimited approval to direct doctoral dissertation research rather than 5-year approval; Appendix A, Management Information Systems 5600 should be in the Department of Business Administration.

In terms of curricular matters, Klindt indicated that Business Communications 5100 had also been approved by the College of Communications.

The Senate approved the Graduate Council minutes of 28 February 1985.

The following announcements were made by Fred Venditti:

1. The statement of principles regarding administrative appointments, which was approved at the 8 April Senate meeting, has been distributed to the chairpersons of the faculty governance bodies at other UT system schools. The President of the Faculty Senate at UT Chattanooga reported recently to Venditti that the principles were approved unanimously at UTC. When the other system schools respond, the principles will be sent to the Board of Trustees.

2. Senators were reminded to send committee preferences to Marian Moffett, chair of the Committee on Committees. Deadline for receipt of preferences is 15 May.

3. The date for the next Senate Executive Committee meeting has been changed from 20 May to Wednesday 22 May at 3:15 P.M. in room 202 of the University Center.

4. Written reports have been received from the Research Council and the Student Affairs Committee.' These will be presented orally at the next scheduled Senate meeting, 15 July. Chairpersons of other Senate Committees should submit annual written reports to the secretary and be prepared to discuss them orally at the July meeting.

Venditti made the following correction in the 8 April Senate minutes: Page six, the last line was missing. It should read: It deals with exceptions in high school course requirements for entrance to UTK. The complete policy may be found on p. 6216 of the minutes.

The minutes of the 8 April 1985 Senate meeting were approved as corrected.

From the Executive Committee minutes of 16 April, Venditti mentioned that he had received the bylaws from the new organization, The Tennessee Higher Education Assembly. They will be discussed by the Executive Committee and then presented to the full Senate.

The minutes of the Executive Committee meeting of 16 April 1985 were accepted by the Senate.

Lee Humphreys, chair, reported that the Educational Policy Committee had been considering, at the request of the Senate, the relationship of the Educational Policy Committee to the Undergraduate and Graduate Councils as well as the more general question of how faculty participation in curricular decisions might be enhanced. As a result of deliberations on these matters, six proposals were developed and have been approved in principle by the Executive Committee.

The proposals and rationale for them were distributed with materials for today's meeting. Humphreys requested Senate action on them; following is that action.

LeRoy Graf moved to amend Proposal I so that the chairperson of the Research Council would be included in the membership of the Educational Policy Committee. Ken Walker seconded the motion. The motion passed.

Henry Fribourg moved to amend Proposal IV as follows: At one Senate meeting each quarter, the minutes of the Councils as presented by the Educational Policy committee, will be the first item on the agenda after the approval of minutes of previous Senate meetings.

Bobby Bledsoe seconded the motion to amend. It passed.

Ken Walker moved approval. of the six proposals as amended. Jack Wasserman was the second. The proposals passed unanimously. They appear below:

Proposal I: Membership of the Educational Policy Committee will consist of the Chairperson of the Undergraduate Council, the Chairperson of the Graduate Council, the Chairperson of the Research Council, a faculty Councilor elected by each Council, an elected representative of the Student Academic council, an elected representative of the Graduate Student Council, and six elected members of the Faculty Senate. The six elected members of the Senate will serve two-year staggered terms. The Chairperson of the committee will be selected from the Senate members on the committee.

Proposal II: The Educational Policy Committee will concern itself with the study, establishment, and implementation of the curricular and instructional goals of the University, referring appropriate issues to the Undergraduate and Graduate Councils and such subcommittees as it may establish, and make recommendations regarding academic policy to the Senate. Every other year the Educational Policy Committee will provide the Senate, through the Executive Committee, a written review of the operation and procedures of the Graduate and Undergraduate Councils.

Proposal III: The Undergraduate Council and the Graduate Council will report to the full Senate through the Educational Policy Committee. The Committee will review the minutes of the Councils and work with the Chairpersons of the Councils to prepare the presentation of the Councils' minutes for full Senate consideration. Items of special importance and policy issues will be highlighted and arrangements made to facilitate Senate consideration through presentation of necessary material, information, and points of view. This review by the Educational Policy Committee will not. constitute a new stage of approval of the councils' minutes.

Proposal IV: At one Senate meeting each quarter, the minutes of the Councils, as presented by the Educational Policy Committee, will be the first item on the agenda after the approval of minutes of previous Senate meetings. Council materials may come before the Senate at other meetings when action is deemed imperative by the Educational Policy Committee, and other business may come before the Senate at the meeting designated for the Councils as time permits.

Proposal V: The Undergraduate Council will be chaired by the Vice Provost with primary responsibility for undergraduate study. The Graduate Council will be chaired by the Vice Provost with primary responsibility for graduate study.

Proposal VI: The Educational Policy Committee will meet once each term with the Chancellor, the agenda for this meeting being determined by the Chancellor and the Chair of the committee. A report of this meeting will be submitted to the Senate.

Lee Humphreys, at the request of the Educational Policy Committee, presented the following proposed bylaws changes.

1. Replace Bylaws p. 7 (2), paragraph 1, with the following:

Graduate Council. Membership shall consist of elected representatives chosen for three-year terms from the schools and colleges of the University engaged in graduate work and two graduate students elected by the Graduate Student Council. Each college or school engaged in graduate work shall have one elected member, with additional elected members apportioned by 200 full-time equivalent graduate students or major fraction thereof per college or school. Elected members must be authorized to teach 6000-level courses where appropriate, and, where not, shall regularly teach graduate courses or supervise graduate study. Ex officio members shall be the Vice Provost primarily responsible for graduate study, who shall serve as chair, the Chair of the Research Council, and the Dean of Continuing Education.

2. The Educational Policy Committee will ask all units with elected representatives to the Graduate and Undergraduate Councils to determine and report on a process whereby their representatives will interact regularly with the collegiate constituents who elect them. This interaction will become part of the criteria stipulated for membership on the Councils.

In a discussion of the first change, George Everett moved the following amendment: Elected members must be those who regularly teach graduate courses or supervise graduate study. The amendment failed by a vote of 37 to 16.

Other discussion of the proposed first change centered on the question of apportionment; there was confusion about the number of members each unit would be allowed. Because of this confusion, Ken Walker, after a friendly amendment from Patrick Carney, moved that the changes be referred back to the Educational Policy Committee for refinement and then to the Senate Bylaws Committee. The Bylaws Committee will be responsible for presenting them to the Senate.

Tom Hood seconded the motion. It passed. Marian Moffett, chair of the Bylaws Committee, mentioned that in order to have these changes presented at the July Senate meeting, the Educational Policy Committee would have to act expeditiously since bylaws changes must be distributed twenty-eight days before action may be taken.

C. W. Minkel gave highlights from the 11 April 1985 Graduate Council meeting. he mentioned the following: 1) the Graduate Council will vote at the 27 June meeting on the minimum standards for short courses as proposed by the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools; 2) the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools has been requested to modify the guidelines which specifies that graduate teaching assistants must have completed 18 semester hours in the teaching field before receiving appointments; and 3) a joint task force from the Tennessee Council of Graduate Schools and the Tennessee Higher Education Commission are working on establishing essential components of quality for Master's degree programs.

The Graduate council minutes of 11 April 1985 were approved.

Linda Tober gave the report. As the first item to be considered, she asked for Senate action on the University Studies courses (Undergraduate Council Minutes 7 March 1985, pp. 6228-29) which had been postponed from the last Senate meeting.

Paul Pinckney, who had made the motion to postpone, stated that after looking into the courses in question in greater detail, he was satisfied that they were academically rigorous and he was withdrawing his objections.

Pat Carney moved approval of the University Studies courses as the appear on pp. 6228-29 and 6260 of the Undergraduate Council minutes. The motion passed.

From the Undergraduate Council minutes of 18 April, Tober called attention to the new withdrawal policy: a "W" will not appear on a student's transcript if a course is dropped before the appropriate deadline (p. 6233 of minutes).

In response to a question regarding the semester calendar, Tober indicated that there would be a special meeting of the Undergraduate Council on 18 July at 1:30 p.m. to consider quarter curricular changes. The plan is to publish a two-year catalog for 1986 through Spring 1988. The last time quarter curricular modifications will be permitted will be at the October 1985 Undergraduate Council meeting.

Ken McCullough moved approval of the Undergraduate Council minutes of the 18 April 1985 meeting.

The minutes were approved.

Dolly Hough, chairperson of the Nominating Committee, reported that Bernard Silverstein, Professor of Audiology and Speech Pathology, had been elected President-elect of the Senate.

Fred Venditti presented the Faculty Workload Policy which had been approved in principle by the Senate Executive Committee. A heated discussion ensued. Following are actions taken by the Senate in regard to the policy.

Tom Hood moved to amend the first paragraph, second sentence: The individual mix of these responsibilities shall be determined by the Department Head, in consultation with each faculty member, with the review and approval of the Dean and the Provost. LeRoy Graf seconded the amendment. It passed by voice vote.

Ken McCullough moved to strike the last sentence in the first paragraph. Betty Brown was the second. The motion failed by voice vote.

George Everett moved that consideration of the policy be postponed. The motion did not receive a second.

Alex Van Hook moved to rearrange the paragraphs so that paragraphs two and three were reversed. Henry Fribourg seconded the motion. It failed by voice vote.

Ken Walker moved approval of the policy as amended. Marian Moffett was the second.

George Everett questioned whether there was a quorum.

Venditti ruled a quorum was present. The Senate approved the faculty workload policy as follows.

The assigned workload for full-time faculty shall. consist of a combination of teaching, advising, research and/or creative activities and institutional and/or public service. The individual mix of these responsibilities shall be determined by the Department Head, in consultation with each faculty member, with the review and approval of the Dean and the Provost. The 'University requires that each member of the faculty perform a reasonable and equitable amount of work each year.

The normal maximum teaching load for a full-time faculty member engaged only in classroom teaching shall be 12 credit hours each term of the academic year. The actual teaching load shall be based on such things as class size and the number of examinations, term papers and other assignments that require grading and evaluation. In addition, the number of different courses taught and other appropriate consideration's shall be used to determine teaching load.

The classroom teaching load shall be reduced by the Department Head for other justifiable reasons including student advising, active involvement in research. and/or creative activities (with publication or other suitable forms of recognition), direction of graduate theses or dissertations, administrative duties, and institutional and/or public service.

The teaching of non-credit courses or workshops and participation in externally funded university projects may be substituted by the University for an equivalent number of credit courses.

It shall be the responsibility of the Department Head and Dean to certify to the Provost that a reasonable and equitable workload has been assigned to each member of the faculty.

Joe Johnson attended today's meeting to provide a progress report and to answer questions about the status of the arena. He reported that the university will take whatever steps are necessary to ensure that the structure is safe; consultants, architects and engineers must assure university officials that the completed building satisfies all codes. In addition, an independent consultant will examine the structure and make an assessment regarding its soundness.

In response to questions, Johnson replied that no academic funds were involved in the arena project, and that the complete file concerning the building was available in the office of the university architect.

The minutes of the Senate meeting of 6 May 1985 were approved as distributed.

Venditti mentioned that the prayer statement endorsed by the Senate Executive Committee was discussed in the minutes of the 22 May and 1 July Executive Committee meetings. Both these sets of minutes were sent to all Senators in the packet of materials for today's meeting. Venditti distributed also to Senators in attendance today, the remarks and the prayer statement which he read to the Board at their June meeting. Venditti noted that the last paragraph of the prayer statement which appears in the 22 May minutes was different from the one presented to the Board. The last paragraph as presented to the Board follows:

We do not request any action on this matter at this meeting. Rather, in the spirit of tolerance and good will, we encourage you to reconsider the practice of public prayers in settings such as athletic events and to prohibit religious ceremonies in connection with such events.

From the 22 May minutes, Venditti requested that the Senate approve, in principle, the Constitution and Bylaws of the Tennessee Higher Education Assembly. Ken McCullough moved approval. It passed unanimously.

From the 1 July minutes, Venditti called attention to the new Senate secretary, Wayne Waller. Waller was present at today's meeting and was introduced.

Another item from the 1 July minutes dealt with the revised honors policy as proposed by the Undergraduate Council. Bernard Silverstein had expressed concern with the proposed revision and distributed at today's meeting data to illustrate difference in the UGC proposal and the Silverstein modification of it. Silverstein explained that his primary concern was the restrictiveness of the UGC proposal as it related to the highest honors category. The Senate, by consensus, agreed to refer the Silverstein proposal to the UGC for consideration.

Marian Moffett mentioned a final item from the 1 July minutes. She requested volunteers and/or suggestions for faculty members to serve on the Semester Transition Committee. Faculty from the Colleges of Agriculture, Engineering or other professional programs are particularly needed. Submit names to Moffett.

The minutes of the 22 May and 1 July 1985 Executive Committee meetings were accepted by the Senate.

Marian Moffett, chair, discussed ten proposed Senate bylaws changes. The proposed changes, which included the rationale for the changes, had been distributed to all Senators prior to today's meeting. Moffett summarized the changes as follows: 1) altering the agenda of Senate meetings to allow curricular matters to be highlighted at one meeting per quarter; 2) increasing faculty representation on the Educational Policy Committee which would include the chair of the Research Council as well as several other additional faculty members; 3) and 4) removing faculty members as chairpersons of the Undergraduate and Graduate Councils; 5) removing student members from the Senate Executive Committee; 6) deleting the annual report of the past president of the Senate; 7) including the faculty chairperson of the UT Athletics Board as an ex officio member of the Senate Athletics Committee; 8) providing for cooperation among the UTK Faculty and Staff Benefits Committee and similar committees at other institutions in Tennessee; 9) changing the terms of International Education Committee members to a calendar year rather than an academic year; and 10) removing students from the Professional Development Committee.

Ken Walker moved to vote on the proposals as a package. LeRoy Graf was the second. The Senate approved unanimously the proposed bylaws changes.

Marian Moffett, chair, moved approval of the committee assignments as proposed by the Committee on Committees. There was some discussion as to the ratio of Senators to non-Senators on the committees. Moffett responded that committee appointments met Senate bylaws requirements and that every Senator had been placed on at least one committee. She pointed out, however, that the committee membership list as distributed to Senators did not include ex officio members.

Henry Fribourg mentioned that the Faculty and Staff Benefits Committee was missing the names of some staff people.

The Senate approved the committee assignments.

Lorayne Lester, chair, gave the report. She began by giving a brief history of the committee. It was charged in 1983 with studying the salary allocation process at UTK. In 1984, the Senate Budget Committee surveyed deans and directors on this topic and submitted a report to the Senate (Senate minutes 30 April 1984). During the 1964-85 school year there was a new study which extended to department beads. The latest study, a seven page questionnaire, was sent to 65 people with an 80 percent return.

Lester noted that she was making an interim report, but indicated that there were some preliminary generalizations which could be made from the data which had been analyzed. Among those generalizations were: 1) department beads have primary responsibility for salary allocation and they believe they are fair and equitable in such allocation; 2) department heads do not want faculty involvement in this process (only three respondents reported faculty salary committees); 3) heads believe the faculty is underpaid; 4) heads have diverse opinions regarding the publishing of salaries; and 5) beads award salary increases on the basis of merit.

Alex Van Hook, chair, led the discussion of the Research Council's report which had been distributed with materials for today's meeting. The discussion focused primarily on whether the report had placed too much emphasis on research at the expense of teaching. Van Hook defended the Council position by stating that obviously research was a major priority, but there was no intention to diminish the importance of teaching; faculty should be both teachers and researchers.

Several amendments were suggested in regard to the recommendations section of the report (pp. 4-6) which the Senate was asked to approve. They follow: John Sebert moved to amend 2b to read: Ensure that research and other creative activity receive strong consideration in tenure/promotion decisions at UTK.

The amendment passed.

Amy Hess moved to amend 4a by deleting as well as faculty members, be research oriented. The amendment passed.

Henry Frandsen moved to amend 6a by deleting sell jobs, not education per se.

The amendment passed.

The Senate approved the recommendations of the Research Council as amended. They follow.

1. Research Leadership. Clear spokespersons at the highest possible university and campus levels working diligently, continuously and articulately on expressing the continuing importance of research are essential. Such persons must be identified, charged and supported.

a. The importance of the research function must be stressed at every intermediate level and such expression must include sponsored and unsponsored research, creative activity and scholarship.

b. A reporting/public relations mechanism to take the best possible advantage of spokespersons' statements concerning research, and of research progress within the university, must be implemented.

c. Statewide community participation in the research effort, and identification of the community with that effort, must be stimulated.

2. Research Incentives. Normally every faculty member should be given the opportunity and will be expected to participate in research/scholarly activity. Activity in research, scholarship, and creative activity will be evaluated and rewarded.

a. Salaries/merit raises should reward superior scholarly performance. Recent trends toward inflationary compression of salary ranges must be avoided. This policy must be clearly communicated to faculty, department beads and deans.

b. Ensure that research and other creative activity receive strong consideration in tenure/promotion decisions at UTK.

c. Increase the fraction of overhead returned to colleges, departments, and principal investigators, insuring that each receives an equitable portion. We find these monies particularly effective in stimulating research activity, particularly sponsored research.

d. The Office of Research Administration should make every effort to collect a larger fraction of the overhead rate as negotiated with the federal government. The extra monies thus collected should be used to stimulate research/scholarly works.

e. A substantial increase in the present UTK program for seed money grants, grants to young faculty members, leave money, etc. should be effected promptly. (Refer to the senate approved motion suggesting yearly increases in this program in steps of $250,000 pa to $1,000,000 or 10% of overhead monies collected, whichever is larger.) A significant infusion of new state money into this program would be appropriate.

3. Research organization.

a. Encourage the establishment of research centers and institutes both between and within colleges and units. State criteria which new centers must meet and maintain. Establish procedures to terminate weak and moribund ones. Improve communication between units in order to stimulate cooperative activity outside traditional college/ department lines.

b. Continue the effectiveness of the Office of Research Administration. Increase staff support to that office so that it has the resources to define and implement effective research strategies for UTK as well as continuing to serve efficiently in pre-award and post-award grant and contract activity.

c. Substantially improve working relations and research cooperation between UTK, UTMRC, UTSI, UT Ag. Institute, and UTHS Memphis. The University has not taken proper advantage of the stimulation that such cooperative ties might supply.

d. Significantly increase the level of research administrative support at departmental and unit levels.

4. Recruitment.

a. Ensure that future deans and department heads be research facilitators, and be held accountable for their actions regarding same.

b. The faculty-hiring model now being implemented via "Science Alliance" must be supplemented by a policy of appointing strong department heads committed to the recruitment of research-active younger faculty.

5. Faculty Governance.

a. Strengthen the role of the Research Council. Clarify the range and scope of its duties. Modify the procedure of selection of its members to insure proper representation from all units with forceful advocates of research.

b. Centralize the organization of compliance committees. Provide them with effective administrative support. Determine whether they should report directly to the vice-provost or through the research council to the senate and the vice-provost.

c. The Faculty Senate, in cooperation with the Research and Graduate Councils, should establish a faculty committee to consider our present five year unit reviews and the administrative response to those reviews.

6. University/Government/Industry relationships.

a. Take steps toward the creation of a statewide government/university/ business commission following the NJ model. Emphasize economic opportunity.

b. Continue to take advantage of existing ties with the industrial/ government facilities at Oak Ridge.

c. Employ the incubator model (cf. "Pellissippi Parkway") and utilize venture capital as appropriate.

d. Engage in an aggressive marketing program for university held patents and licenses.

Bruce Wheeler, chair, summarized a report dealing with students older than 25. The full report may be found in the materials distributed for today's meeting. After Wheeler agreed to a suggestion from LeRoy Graf that the committee rephrase the number one recommendation to emphasize the department head's role in making faculty aware of the presence and problems of older students, Bernie Silverstein moved and the Senate voted approval of the following recommendations:

1) That information (including this report and any material coming from the Chancellor's Committee on Re-Entry Students) be distributed to faculty members as a way of making then more aware of the presence and problems of undergraduates older than 25.

2) At present the Chancellor has approved funding for an informational handbook for undergraduates older than 25. The Committee applauds this move, and recommends that copies of that informational handbook (working title: Survival Handbook for SOTAs) be distributed to faculty members. Publication scheduled for fall 1985.

3) That each college or program examine its academic advising (including hours, information materials especially of interest to older undergraduates, etc.) to make sure that older students are receiving proper and sufficient advising.

4) That the Chancellor's Committee on Re-Entry Students carefully examine advising procedures for older undergraduates in each college or program to see whether the special I needs of this student population are being met.

Tom Klindt reported on the minutes of the Graduate Council meeting of 27 June. He noted that Council had adopted mininum requirements for graduate workshops and short courses as presented in the document Quality in Graduate Short Courses and Workshops. Full details of the standards may be found in the minutes. Items to be included at the next Council meeting are consideration of dual PhD programs and use of uniform terminology in graduate programs.

In regard to curricular matters, Henry Fribourg questioned the PhD program in Computer Science. His concern was a lack of staffing for the program. John Bradley, Head of Math, assured the Senate that there would be adequate funding to provide the needed faculty.

Fribourg also questioned whether the course, Public Health 5400 Biostatistics had been approved by the Statistics Committee. Klindt replied that he did not believe the Statistics Committee, which was charged with preventing duplication in statistics courses, was still. functioning.

Henry Frandsen expressed the opinion that departments requesting revision in number, title, description and prerequisites were in actuality introducing new courses. Klindt responded that the curricular review committee of the Council took this into consideration before approving revisions.

Jo Lynn Cunningham moved that Technological and Adult Education course 5160 entitled Internship in Technological and Adult Education be postponed since the course might overlap with a course in her department (Child and Family Studies). The motion to postpone passed.

The Graduate Council minutes with the Cunningham exception of 27 June 1985 were approved.

Klindt concluded his presentation, by announcing the following personnel changes in the Graduate School: Mary Richards and Tom Klindt have resigned as of 31 July and 1 August and Diana Lopez is on a two year leave-of-absence to work with SAMS. There are two new assistant deans, Wayne Davis and Linda Painter.

Linda Tober reported on the Undergraduate Council minutes of 23 May 1965. She called attention to policy changes in regard to revision in honors terminology and categories. She agreed to take the Silverstein suggested revisions in the policy back to the Undergraduate Council and to report back to the Senate in the Fall. Another policy change which Tober mentioned was that there would be mandatory advising for every student every term and that advising centers would be established in all colleges and schools. Don Williams questioned requiring advising centers. He was of the opinion that the College of Agriculture bad exceptional advising without such a center. Tober explained that the advising center was to be interpreted very broadly; it could mean a professor's office. The intent is to strengthen advising. For some colleges this would mean a continuance of faculty advising rather than centers.

In terms of curricular materials, Tober pointed out that courses not taught in four years bad been purged from the catalog. She also mentioned that the education teacher certification program as proposed by the College of Education could not become effective Fall, 1985 since such a change requires approval from the Board of Trustees.

In order that the core courses could be offered in Fall, 1.985, Lynn Cagle moved that the proposal from the College of Education be modified to delete all program certification descriptions but to approve core courses required for teacher certification. Carl Murphy was the second for the notion. It passed.

Marian Moffett pointed out an inconsistency from the School of Architecture in regard to the crosslisting of courses 4940 Proxemics and 4950 Environment as Code. In the Graduate Council minutes, Interior Design had been listed as the primary department. In the UGC minutes, Architecture was designated as primary. Tober agreed to clarify the inconsistency.

Bernie Silverstein moved approval of the Undergraduate Council minutes of 23 May 1985. The Senate approved the minutes as amended.

Bernie Silverstein read resolutions in recognition of the services of the Senate secretary and president. Full texts of the resolutions follow.

UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE, KNOXVILLE
FACULTY SENATE RESOLUTION
EXPRESSING APPRECIATION TO
DR. NANCY E. LAY
FOR HER FAITHFUL AND OUTSTANDING SERVICE:
AS SECRETARY OF THE SENATE FROM 1981 TO 1985

WHEREAS, DR. NANCY E. LAY has served conscientiously and tirelessly as Secretary to the Faculty Senate of the University of Tennessee, Knoxville for a period of four years; and
WHEREAS, Dr. Lay has served with distinction and good humor as Secretary to the Senate Executive Committee under four Senate Presidents; and
WHEREAS, as a member of the Senate Executive Committee she has been an active participant and often a source of wise counsel; and
WHEREAS, throughout her tenure she did a truly excellent job in keeping Senate and Executive Committee Minutes, and in all other ways met the responsibilities of a position of great importance to the smooth functioning of the Senate.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE: IT RESOLVED that the UTK Faculty Senate expresses its sincere appreciation to Dr. Lay for her faithful and outstanding service to the Faculty Senate and the University of Tennessee, Knoxville; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a copy of this Resolution be presented to Dr. Lay and that the Resolution be made a part of the minutes of the Senate meeting held on July 15, 1985.

UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE, KNOXVILLE
FACULTY SENATE RESOLUTION
EXPRESSING APPRECIATION TO
DR. FREDERICK P. VENDITTI
FOR HIS DEVOTED SERVICE AND OUTSTANDING LEADERSHIP
AS SENATE PRESIDENT DURING THE 1984-85 TERM

WHEREAS, DR. FREDERICK P. VENDITTI has served admirably as President of the University of Tennessee, Knoxville Faculty Senate during the 1984- 85 term; and
WHEREAS, Dr. Venditti has also served with distinction as Chair of the Senate Executive Committee; and
WHEREAS, as an ex-officio member, he has provided strong leadership and direction to the various committees of the Senate; and
WHEREAS, Dr. Venditti has been instrumental in establishing and continuing excellent relations between the Senate and the System and UTK administrations; and
WHEREAS, he has led the Senate as President in a true spirit of collegiality and good will.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the UTK Faculty Senate expresses its sincere appreciation to Dr. Venditti for his outstanding leadership and devoted service to the Faculty Senate and the University of Tennessee, Knoxville; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a copy of this Resolution be presented to Dr. Venditti and that the Resolution be made a part of the minutes of the Senate meeting held on July 15, 1985.

The Senate approved the resolutions by applauding the retiring officers. Venditti remarked, in a somewhat quiet tone, that such recognition could not be bestowed on more deserving people. Lay, although not responding, silently agreed. Goodbye.